Versailles

This past weekend, I went to Paris, France. It is amazing how much history there is in Paris. One of the days that we were there, we went to Versailles and saw the Chateau de Versailles. This was really interesting because in our politics and culture class we learned about the peace treaty of Versailles that was implemented at the end of the first world war.

The Treaty of Versailles was a peace treaty that ended the war between Germany and the other allied countries. This treaty was signed on June 28, 1919. This is interesting because this is exactly 5 years after the assassination of Franz Ferdinand, which is one of the tragic events that started the war. After the actual treaty was signed, it took another 6 months of negotiations to come to a conclusion about the treaty. All of this occurred at the Paris Peace Conference. One of the most important and controversial aspects of this treaty was to make sure that Germany accepted the responsibility of starting the war, paid reparations, and to disarmed their army. In the end, though, this treaty did not leave Germany permanently weakened, as this would later prove to be one of the leading factors that would trigger the second world war.

During our visit to Versailles,I learned that Versailles is not only famous for the actual building and the treaty of Versailles, but for being an absolute monarchy. I also learned a lot about the treaty and where it was signed. I got to walk and see the actual room that the Paris Peace Conference was held and where the Treaty of Versailles was signed in. Since I have learned about the treaty, I thought that it was really neat! The treaty was signed in the room directly next to King Louis bedroom, which I thought was a little odd. But I later learned that, back then, they were very open with people and did not even mind if there were people in the room while they were either sleeping or even dressing. However, King Louis was not alive when the treaty was signed and the monarchy fell in France during the war. Overall though, this was a very interesting and informative trip!

This is a picture of “The Signing of Peace in the Hall of Mirrors, Versailles, 28 June 1919.”

Le Corbusier

For my art appreciation class, I had the chance to visit the Barbican Centre. In this centre there was a special exhibit on Le Corbusier. Le Corbusier was a Swiss-French architect, an urbanist, a designer, a writer, and a painter. Le Corbusier is the man who pioneered what is now called Modern architecture. He was also the most famous architect of the 20th century, he was known for both his architectural projects and his theoretical thought. Although Le Corbusier was born in Switzerland, he moved to France when he was in his thirties. During the first world war though, he moved back to Switzerland making sure not to return to Paris until the war was over. Here, he taught at his old school and worked on various architectural ideas/projects.

Le Corbusier had a large impact on cities all around the world. Although he has not been directly apart of many construction projects, his ideas have been. His designs often get used over and over again. Many of his designs were not seen in North America but they were a huge part of the solution to the housing shortage in Europe after WWII. It is amazing to me to see how much of his work and his ideas had such a huge impact on other people and places, especially during the housing shortage after WWII. This was a huge issue, and it was because of Le Corbusier's ideas that this big problem was resolved. Many of his works were destroyed throughout WWII. They were oftentimes damaged or bombed by the Nazi's in France.

One of Le Corbusier’s first contributions was called the Domino house, done in 1914. He decided to do this because he thought that WWI would be ending shortly and that there would be a much-needed construction effort. The Domino house was based on a standard concrete form. It "imposed a uniformity" that Le Corbusier thought was missing from the city.

Similar to Picasso, Le Corbusier's style of work completely changed post-war. He would oftentimes come up with his best works post war. After seeing all of the destruction that the wars caused, Le Corbusier would come up with better ways than his pre war ways to fix buildings and homes. Another interesting fact that I learned about Le Corbusier was that he had many collaborators who would help him with his projects. Many of these collaborators, including one of his closest friends Jeanneret, stopped working with Le Corbusier to move back to Switzerland to join the resistance during WWII. This would really affect his work.

Le Corbusier was a very interesting man and I learned a lot about him and his works through viewing the special exhibit on him. I love learning about new people who had such an affect on the world. He also played such a large role during WWI and WWII. I never knew who Le Corbusier was before attending this exhibit. I am surprised that I had never heard of him just because it seems as if he played an important role during the wars.

Here is a picture of Le Corbusier:

British Politics

For my British Life and Culture class, we had a speaker named Dr. Brian Thomas. He lectured us on British Politics. It was very interesting to see all of the differences between the American government and the British government. He said that Britain's Parliamentary system is very un-American, just as the American Constitution is extremely un-British, and that is the way it should be.
Some of the major differences between the American government and the British government are:
-the British government does not have a written Constitution (because they have no constituent states to worry about)
-the British government does not have a federal state, but a Unitary system
-the local authorities in Britain have little to no power in the government
-the Brits do not believe in a democracy
-parties are too strong in the British Government
-everything runs from London, there is no real power anywhere else
Instead of having a democracy, the British government is broken up into 3 different systems:
-Monarch/Prime Minister(because Britain believes that the State is permanent but the government is not, therefore each state should have its own head)-they decide when the elections are held
-House of Lords
-House of Commons
The Queen is the Monarch of country and she is not elected by the people, but born into her position. By being head of state, she makes 9 million pounds a year and she works 57 hours a week. She is a very busy lady! An interesting fact that Dr. Thomas explained to us was that the British Monarchy cost as much in 1987 as the 4 holidays that Ronald Regan took. It's crazy to me how cheap it is!
The House of Lord's are not elected by the people either; most of them are elected by the Queen or by the recommendation of the Prime Minister. They are a part of Parliament and play a big role in law-making and in changing the legislation. The House of Lord's are composed of: lawyers, scientists, academics, civil servants, diplomats, poets, sportsmen, engineers, bishops, and businessmen-a very diverse group of people.
The House of Commons are elected by the people. Dr. Thomas described the House of Commons as more like a beer garden than Parliamentary. The House of Commons is a confrontational body, the Government sits on one side and the Opposition sits on the other. So, the Opposition does not have much power, the Government does.
It is so interesting to learn about different governments from ours. I did not realize that there were so many major differences between the American and the British Governments. It makes me feel so ignorant, so I am glad that I have this opportunity to study abroad and to learn about different politics and cultures.
The day after our lecture on British Politics, we received a guided tour of Parliament; I really enjoyed it. We got to go into the House of Lords and House of Commons rooms, where they discuss and make laws. Our tour guide explained to us how these two things are similar to the American Senate and the House of Representatives. One of my favorite parts of Parliament was Westminster Hall, the first thing you see when you walk in. It is one of the oldest parts of Parliament. The wooden ceiling has no nails holding it together, only pressure; I thought that was pretty amazing. There were also plaques on the floor in this hall. They symbolized where the royalty was laid out for 3 days and 3 nights after passing away. An interesting fact: Winston Churchill was an exception to the royalty rule and was invited by the Queen to be laid out in Parliament. It was an amazing experience to be able to see Parliament. The following week we were able to go inside of the Royal Courts of Justice. Here, we were able to go and sit in on several different court cases, where they interpret the laws. This was also a very neat experience!
Other than attending these field trips, I don't know of any other direct contact that I have had with British Politics. I have, however, read a lot of things that have been going on with British Politics in newspapers (on the tube), such as the G20 Conference that is happening right now. This is amazing that the G20 Conference is happening in London right now. I am excited that I get to be a part of what is the biggest world leader's conference in a long time.

Picasso

For my Art Appreciation class I went to the National Gallery and viewed the Picasso exhibit. I have seen works by Picasso before but I have never really understood them or really understood him. After I finished walking through the exhibit and viewing his paintings, there was a video available to watch at the very end. It happened to be a video on the life of Picasso. It really helped me to understand him and his paintings better.
Picasso was a 20th century artist, the most known artist of that time. He was said to have defined that century. He was the one who came up with the idea of modern art. Some of his most famous works have been, still life's, nudes, and self-portraits. He went through three defined periods during his art career, the blue period: when he was struggling to make his name, the rose period: when he was into making sculptures, and the cubism period. His style of artwork changed every time he was in a new period. He would typically take works from other artists and copy them but put them into his own style, trying to mark them as his own. He would change his style if he noticed that other artists started using it.
The most interesting thing that I learned about Picasso, though, was that he was living in Paris during the Nazi-occupation in World War II. Many of his works were based off of this time in his life. He had many anti-war paintings. Death was one of the main subjects of many of Picasso's paintings, such as his still life pieces. Picasso was not allowed to show his works during this time because the Nazi's outlawed it, but he continued to sneak into his studio almost everyday and paint. The Nazi's also outlawed bronze casting in Paris. But Picasso did not let this stop him. He would have bronze smuggled to him by the French resistance movements. After the war was over, Picasso got remarried twice, and had two children. They soon started to become the focus of his artwork. It's interesting to me to see how much the war can affect people, especially artists and writers. Paintings are an interesting way of seeing what the war was really like, especially Picasso's paintings. Because his paintings are so different, it's neat to see how people interpret them.

Here is a painting by Picasso, made during the war, of a woman with a terrified face:

The Avalon Project

We were given articles to read and discuss in my politics and culture class. The one that I got was entitled, "Joint Message of Assistance to the Soviet Union from President Roosevelt and Prime Minister Churchill : August 15, 1941." It really grabbed my attention.
Here is the article:
The following is the text of a joint message from President Roosevelt and Prime Minister Churchill delivered personally on Friday afternoon, August 15, by the British and American Ambassadors to Josef Stalin, President of the Soviet of Peoples Commissars of the U.S.S.R.: We have taken the opportunity afforded by the consideration of the report of Mr. Harry Hopkins on his return from Moscow to consult together as to how best our two countries can help your country in the splendid defense that you are making against the Nazi attack. We are at the moment cooperating to provide you with the very maximum of supplies that you most urgently need. Already many shiploads have left our shores and more will leave in the immediate future. We must now turn our minds to the consideration of a more long term policy, since there is still a long and hard path to be traversed before there can be won that complete victory without which our efforts and sacrifices would be wasted. The war goes on upon many fronts and before it is over there may be further fighting fronts that will be developed. Our resources though immense are limited, and it must become a question as to where and when those resources can best be used to further the greatest extent our common effort. This applies equally to manufactured war supplies and to raw materials. The needs and demands of your and our armed services can only be determined in the light of the full knowledge of the many factors which must be taken into consideration in the decisions that we make. In order that all of us may be in a position to arrive at speedy decisions as to the apportionment of our joint resources, we suggest that we prepare for a meeting to be held at Moscow, to which we would send high representatives who could discuss these matters directly with you. If this conference appeals to you, we want you to know that pending the decisions of that conference we shall continue to send supplies and material as rapidly as possible. We realize fully how vitally important to the defeat of Hitlerism is the brave and steadfast resistance of the Soviet Union and we feel therefore that we must not in any circumstances fail to act quickly and immediately in this matter on planning the program for the future allocation of our joint resources. Signed: FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT
Signed: WINSTON S. CHURCHILL
This is a very interesting article. It's mainly just about how Britain and America came together, after the second world war, to help out the Soviet Union as much as they could. It is interesting, though, how America came together with Britain to help the Soviet Union because America was a capitalist nation and was completely against communism, which is what the Soviet Union was at the time. During 1941 was also when the Holocaust, with the death camps and everything, was getting really bad. So America and Britain put aside their differences in their political systems, and came together to help out another country in need. This is so amazing to me. It is also interesting that during this time, Germany made a contract with the Soviet Union stating that they would not fight each other. The Soviet Union abode by this rule, but the Germans just made it up to gain time to fight and take over other countries.
In this letter, the American and Britain governments offered to send as much money as they needed, as many supplies as they needed, and just as much help in general as they needed. I think it is so neat how two countries can come together like this and help out another country in a time of need. This shows that America and Britain did not want the Soviet Union to fail, they wanted them to get back up and succeed. These two countries were willing to help their fellow country even after the occurrence of the war. It also states, in the letter, that even though resources are limited, they will still try to help and send as much as possible. They could have just been selfish and kept all of the remaining supplies to themselves but instead they decided to share their wealth. Thankfully Britain and America did share their supplies with the USSR because if not the Soviet Union may not have made it. This is an example of true world unity.

World War I

World War One is an extremely interesting war to me. Especially now that I have learned more about it by going to the Imperial war Museum and by having read the novel Regeneration. The museum gave me a better understanding of the different battles that were fought, the weapons the soldiers used, the uniforms that they wore, and the badges and awards that they received. One of my favorite things that I saw in the WWI exhibit was about the Christmas Truce. During Christmas 1914, something surprising happened on the front lines. All of the men, on both sides, set their hatred and their weapons aside and met in No Man's Land in honor of the Christmas spirit. I think it is so amazing that soldiers who have so much hatred for the other side can lay their weapons down for a day of peace on Christmas. It shows how much Christmas can affect people. I am a little surprised however, that no one attempted to kill someone on the other side, while they were so vulnerable and unarmed. This truly amazes me that something like happened during such a violent war.
The novel Regeneration coincided well with the museum. While the museum gave more of a factual history, the novel gave more of the emotional side from the soldiers that no one ever hears about. It had a great depiction of what it was like for the soldiers and how the war affected them. I loved learning about this part of the war because it was never taught in any of my classes in high school. Since the novel mainly took place in a mental hospital, I learned a lot about individual soldiers through their therapy sessions. I really enjoyed this novel and I learned so much about the war by reading it.

Here is a poem by Sassoon that he wrote during the war that I thought found fascinating:

Siegfried Sassoon (1886-1967) "How to Die"
Dark clouds are smouldering into red While down the craters morning burns. The dying soldier shifts his head To watch the glory that returns; He lifts his fingers toward the skies Where holy brightness breaks in flame; Radiance reflected in his eyes, And on his lips a whispered name. You'd think, to hear some people talk, That lads go West with sobs and curses, And sullen faces white as chalk, Hankering for wreaths and tombs and hearses. But they've been taught the way to do it Like Christian soldiers; not with haste And shuddering groans; but passing through it With due regard for decent taste.

I love how I can read this poem and learn so much about what the war was like. When I read this poem it almost makes me feel as if I am there. It is so neat that soldiers, like Sassoon, thought to write down their experiences from the war. If it weren’t for people like him, we wouldn’t know as much about the wars as we do now. This poem does a great job of explaining what the soldiers were going through and what they saw on a day to day basis.

The Erosion of the British Class System in the 20th Century

For our British Life and Culture class we had a speaker, Dr. Mark Boden, who came to talk to us about the British Class System. He raised many interesting points during the lecture. The one topic that he explained to us that stood out to me the most was when he talked about the erosion of the British class system. He explained what caused the wearing away of the class systems.
During the twentieth century, there was a great deal of change in Britain that caused the erosion of the class system. The two World Wars, WWI and WWII, had a huge impact on the British society. As we read in the novel, Regeneration, many people belonging to the lower class were the ones forced to join WWI at first. As time went on though, there was a greater need for men and men from the middle and upper classes were being forced to go to war as well. By this time, however, the middle and upper classes had more of a desire to go to war because of all of the propaganda. When I visited the WWI exhibit at the Imperial War Museum, I got a better understanding about how class worked during the war. The biggest thing I noticed was how all of the women had to take over the men's jobs while they were gone. They worked extremely hard, but when the men returned, all of the women had to stop working and give their jobs back to the men. This included all women, even the women who had lost their husbands in the war. This means that not all families had a steady income, or an income at all. This is a different way of looking at the class system. This is not classified by lower, middle, or upper class, but by the differences between men and women.
Prior to the wars, a vast separation existed between the upper and lower classes. This was primarily due to the Industrial Revolution which provided substantial wealth to the upper classes. The difficulties and sacrifices caused by the wars had the same effect on society as a whole, regardless of class. The wars, especially WWII, forced the men to fight next to each other, sharing in the trials and tribulations of the front line. I agree with this statement but I am also confused by it because in class we talked about how the officers were classified as a higher class than the rest of the soldiers. They were considered higher up because everyone else listened to them; they were the ones in charge. I think, though, that as the war went on and the soldiers continued fighting next to each other, it caused the two classes to become closer together and altered the way they viewed each other. It also affected the family and friends who remained at home. Sharing limited resources and enduring hardships created a bond between the two groups.
The two wars also affected America’s class systems, forcing the two groups to share similar experiences. Yet unlike Britain, America’s class system has returned to the pre-war days, with a wide distinction between the upper and middle class. This may in part be due to the economical boom experienced by the US in the post war era.